DOCSLIB.ORG

Contra Costa County Northern Waterfront Market Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Contra Costa County Northern Waterfront Market Assessment Contra Costa County Northern Waterfront Market Assessment TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #1 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY NORTHERN WATERFRONT INITIATIVE MARKET ASSESSMENT TO: Rich Seithel, Chief, Annexations and Economic Stimulus Programs Patrick Roche, Principal Planner, Advanced Planning FROM: Gary Craft, Kevin Stichter, Michael Fischer, Monica Isbell, and Chiranjivi Bhamidipati SUBJECT: Economic Overview and Current Profile of Industrial and Maritime-Related Development within the San Francisco Bay Area and Contra Costa County (Task 1) DATE: August 19, 2013 This Memorandum presents the results of Task 1 of the Market Assessment for the Northern Waterfront. Information from Task 2 addressing transportation infrastructure is also included. The purpose of this memo was to provide an overview of the industrial and maritime-related development market conditions and identify and review key trends that could potentially impact the relative economic competitiveness of Contra Costa County’s Northern Waterfront. In summary, goods movement dependent industries and infrastructure play a vital role in the local economy and the economic health of the Northern Waterfront. ACKGROUND I. B Figure 1: Northern Waterfront Study Area The Northern Waterfront Study Area (see map at right) is approximately one mile wide and 55 miles long and contains 63.86 square miles. The Study Area includes six cities, several unincorporated communities, and a variety of unincorporated pockets of land (developed and undeveloped) that are located in the county. Within the Northern Waterfront there is a wide range of land uses from industrial, commercial, residential, marinas, public, and recreational uses, to natural habitat, open space, and wildlife refuges. Northern Waterfront Initiative In early 2013, the County Board of Supervisors launched an initiative to engage stakeholders along the waterfront from both the private and public sectors who are concerned with its economic future; wherein, the stakeholders could share information and exchange ideas about the emerging trends and issues affecting the waterfront with a specific focus on how maritime and landside transportation influences the waterfront’s current and future economic prospects. The primary objective of the Northern Waterfront Initiative is to promote economic development along the county’s working waterfront. -1- Contra Costa County Northern Waterfront Market Assessment Northern Waterfront’s Historical Role Historically, the Northern Waterfront has attracted major industrial users due to its proximity to water that provided easy access for marine transportation. Industrial development came early to Contra Costa County, appearing along the waterfront beginning around the 1860s. 1 Coal was discovered in 1859 in the hills south of Antioch. Several years later copper ore was discovered near Antioch and smelting works were built. Deep water access allowed for the shipping of various commodities including grain and other agriculture products. Port Costa became a major grain port for merchant sailing ships with warehouses and waterfront wharves. Antioch and Pittsburg also were important shipping points for grain (wheat and barley) during the 1860s and 1870s. By the early 1900s some forty factories had opened along the Sacramento River, including C&H Sugar, Standard Oil of California, Union Oil, Redwood Manufacturers Company, and Hercules Powder Works. The first manufactures to come to Contra Costa County were powder and dynamite works serving the mining industry. Chemical plants entered the picture at the turn of the century, as demand for sulfuric acid, chlorine and ammonia fertilizers increased with advances in chemistry and industrial agriculture. Oil refineries were built along the waterfront beginning with Union Oil in 1896; Standard Oil followed in 1901, and four others came in soon thereafter, making Contra Costa one of the leading refining centers in the United States. Crude oil for refining came by pipeline, ship, and rail tank cars from the San Joaquin Valley and Ventura fields. Other major industries included food processing and steel. By 1920, the Northern Waterfront accounted for over half the tonnage on San Francisco Bay. By 1940, Contra Costa was the largest manufacturing center in California in terms of the value of its industrial output. During World War II the Concord Naval Weapons Station was a major munitions ship loading facility. Following the war, other industrial plants were built. For example, DuPont built and operated a petro-chemical manufacturing plant near Oakley for more than forty years from 1956 to 1997. Ports and maritime shipping have played an important role in the trade and commerce of the region. Seaports constitute the hub around which the maritime sector operates, serving as gateways between their hinterlands and overseas markets to which they are linked by commerce. Consequently, waterfront locations have attracted manufacturing and processing industries that want to take advantage of low-cost inbound transportation of raw materials for production and outbound shipments of finished products to both export and domestic markets. Transport of bulk cargo required that manufacturing be done near the port in order to reduce transportation costs. This resulted in the building of large-scale industrial facilities and warehouses with port facilities handling the intermodal transfer of cargo between ships, barges, trucks, and railroads. The Northern Waterfront has followed this historical development pattern. Although manufacturing employment has declined, the 50-mile stretch of shoreline from Hercules to Oakley remains an important economic asset to the region. Given its waterfront setting, with deep- water channels and marine terminals, proximity to two Class 1 railroad lines, electric generating capacity, industrial zoned land, and other assets, Contra Costa’s Northern Waterfront offers a number of key advantages for industrial development. General neglect and declining investment over the past several decades has reduced the Northern Waterfront’s ability to remain competitive as a working waterfront. The physical development of the area which began over 100 years ago was based on a different platform for manufacturing and distributing goods, one which was well-suited to the infrastructure and building types of the time. Today, the main challenge is to figure out ways to adapt and revitalize this older infrastructure and develop the Northern Waterfront into a 21st century model for environmentally-and economically sustainable industrial development. 1 Walker, Richard A. “Industry Builds Out the City: The Suburbanization of Manufacturing in the San Francisco Bay Area, 1850- 1940”, 2004 - 2 - Contra Costa County Northern Waterfront Market Assessment II. OVERVIEW OF INDUSTRIAL AND MARITIME-RELATED DEVELOPMENT MARKET CONDITIONS IN THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Bay Area Industrial Sector2,3 The San Francisco Bay Area has a large diversified economy with a Gross Regional Product (GRP) of $535 billion, making it the 19th largest economy in the world. As a major population center, the Bay Area regional economy is highly dependent on the production, movement, and consumption of goods and services. Goods producing components of the economy include agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting; mining; construction; and manufacturing. Combined, the goods producing industries make up 14.3% of the region’s jobs, with manufacturing being the biggest single component, accounting for almost 66% of the goods producing sector’s employment. Overall, manufacturing is the 5th largest employment sector in the Bay Area. There is a slightly higher concentration of manufacturing employment in the Bay Area than the national average. Although many manufacturing companies do not physically produce products in the region, they do design and develop products locally. While employment in manufacturing is declining as a share of Bay Area employment, its share is falling faster in the rest of the country. Table 1 on the following page shows the major industry sectors and their employment concentrations in the Bay Area, Contra Costa County, and the Northern Waterfront. Manufacturing employment is heavily concentrated along the Northern Waterfront, 2.2 times greater than the national average. The Northern Waterfront also has a greater concentration of manufacturing employment than either the Bay Area or Contra Costa County. Location quotients (LQ) were used to measure the relative concentration of employment by industry within the Bay Area compared to its counterpart in the national economy. LQ coefficients greater than 1.0 denote a higher-concentration of employment for an industry within the region than the national average, which may indicate a possible competitive advantage. Location quotients greater than 1.25 may also indicate that the industry is producing more than can be consumed by the local economy and is serving a larger export market. These export oriented industries bring new dollars into the local economy, typically pay higher wages, and have high job multipliers which support employment growth in other sectors. Much of the Bay Area economy is focused on the technology sector. Biotech and medical instruments are one of the strongest growth sectors in the regional economy. While much of the pharmaceutical component of this sector involves research and development with more of the manufacturing occurring overseas, the precision instrument sector is a growth sector with highly-skilled
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sausalito's Vision for 2040
    The introductory chapter provides an overview of the General Plan, describing the purpose of the plan and its role for the City of Sausalito. The Introduction includes Sausalito’s Vision for 2040, the Authority and Purpose, Organization of the Sausalito General Plan, Implementation of the Plan, Public Participation in Creating the Plan, Sausalito’s History, and Future Trends and Assumptions. SAUSALITO’S VISION FOR 2040 VISION STATEMENT Sausalito is a thriving, safe, and friendly community that sustainably cultivates its natural beauty, history, and its arts and waterfront culture. Due to sea level rise and the continuing effects of climate change, the city seeks to bridge the compelling features and attributes of the city’s past, particularly its unique shoreline neighborhoods, with the environmental inevitabilities of its future. Sausalito embraces environmental stewardship and is dedicated to climate leadership while it strives to conserve the cultural, historic, artistic, business and neighborhood diversity and character that make up the Sausalito community. OVERALL COMMUNITY GOALS The General Plan Update addresses the new and many continuing issues confronting the city since the General Plan was adopted in 1995. The General Plan Update also responds to the many changing conditions of the region, county, and city since the beginning of the 21st century. The following eleven broad goals serve as the basis for more specific policies and implementation strategies. 1. Maintain Sausalito’s small-scale residential neighborhoods, recognizing their geographical, architectural, and cultural diversity, while supporting a range of housing options. 2. Recognize and perpetuate the defining characteristics of Sausalito, including its aesthetic beauty, scenic features, natural and built environment, its history, and its diverse culture.
    [Show full text]
  • From Ferries to Hornblower Cruises
    Getting Out on San Francisco Bay: From Ferries to Hornblower Cruises Author’s Note: This article “Getting Out on San Francisco Bay: From Ferries to Hornblower Cruises ” is a stand-alone article on my website. Further parallel articles on the Bay include chapters in my two main travel guidebooks/ebooks on California. They are Northern California History Travel Adventures: 35 Suggested Trips and Northern California Travel: The Best Options. All my travel guidebooks/ebooks on California can be seen on my Amazon Author Page. By Lee Foster Getting out on San Francisco Bay in a boat of some kind is a concept I recommend to all visitors and locals. San Francisco Bay is such an inviting body of water, especially if your boat trip takes you across the Bay or out beyond the Golden Gate Bridge. From a boat you can see the Bridges, especially the Bay Bridge and the Golden Gate Bridge, plus the skyline profile of the city of San Francisco. You can see the lovely green Marin hillsides and the profiles of the main Bay islands, such as Alcatraz and Angel Islands. The protected Bay waters are usually not too rough. Sometime you will encounter wildlife, such as sea lions and migrating birds. Occasionally, you may pass close to the immense container ships that come through the Golden Gate into the port of Oakland. Their cargo will likely come from China and Korea. The Ferry Option for San Francisco Bay The excursion boat California Hornblower ready to depart on San Francisco Bay There are many ways to get out on San Francisco Bay in a boat, and I have done most of them at one time or another.
    [Show full text]
  • Oakland Coliseum Industrial Center 5800 Coliseum Way | Oakland, CA
    Premier Urban Logistics Location Oakland Coliseum Industrial Center 5800 Coliseum Way | Oakland, CA ±336,680 SF Warehouse For Lease Jason Ovadia Patrick Metzger Greg Matter Jason Cranston Robert Bisnette +1 510 285 5360 +1 510 285 5362 650 480 2220 [email protected] +1 510 661 4011 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] +1 650 480 2100 [email protected] Lic # 01742912 Lic # 01888895 Lic #01380731 Lic # 01253892 Lic # 01474433 Jones Lang LaSalle Brokerage, Inc. Real Estate License # 01856260 Unrivaled Access to Bay80 Area Urban Core 80 Vallejo Port of Benecia 80 Concord San Rafael Richmond Port of 101 Richmond 580 Walnut Creek Oakland 680 Port of Oakland Prologis Oakland Coliseum San Francisco Urban Logistics Center Port of San Francisco Oakland International Airport PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTS Hayward 580 Pleasanton San Francisco • Close proximity to Oakland Airport and International Airport Port of Oakland Fremont • Overweight accessible location San Mateo 880 • Great access to robust workforce 280 101 • Union Pacific Rail capabilities Driving distance Palo Alto • Heavy Power with Back Up Generator 3.5 mi Oakland International Airport 680 5.3 mi Port of Oakland San Jose • Divisible to ±168,340 SF International Airport • Available Q4 2020 16.2 mi SF Financial District San Jose 16.2 mi Port of San Francisco 27.5 mi SF International Airport 36.4 mi San Jose International Airport ±336,680 SF Current Building Configuration 80 Warehouse ±336,680 SF Office ±16,380 SF Site Size 9.93 acres Vallejo Column
    [Show full text]
  • PORT of OAKLAN D Executive Director FRANK KIANG BOARD of PORT COMMISSIONERS DAVID L
    JOHN PROTOPAPPAS TAY YOSHITANI President PORT OF OAKLAND Executive Director PATRICIA A. SCATES BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS DAVID L. ALEXANDER First Vice President 530 Water Street • Oakland, California 94607 Port Attorney KENNETH S. KATZOFF JOHN T. BETTERTON Second Vice President Telephone: (510) 627-1100 Secretary of the Board Facsimile: (510) 763.3562 DARLENE AYERS-JOHNSON TDD: (510) 763.5730 Commissioner ANTHONY A. BATARSE, JR. E-Mail: [email protected] Commissioner WEB: www.portofoakland.com FRANK KIANG Commissioner DAVID KRAMER MINUTES Commissioner Regular Meeting of the Board of Port Commissioners Tuesday, January 20, 2004 - 3:00 PM ROLL CALL President Protopappas called the meeting to order at 3:08 p.m., and the following Commissioners were in attendance: Commissioners Ayers-Johnson, Commissioner Batarse, Second Vice-President Katzoff, Commissioner Kramer, First Vice-President Scates and President Protopappas. Commissioner Kiang was excused. CLOSED SESSION The Board entered into Closed Session at 3:10 p.m. to consider the following items: 1. Conference With Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 54956.9: (1 Matter) 2. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation. Pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 54956.9. Names of Cases: Socorro Salizar v. Port of Oakland, Workers Compensation Appeals Board Case No. OAK 0280204. REGULAR MEETING January 20, 2004 3. Conference With Real Property Negotiator. Government Code Section 54956.8. Property: Oakland Army Base Negotiating Parties: Port of Oakland, Oakland Base Reuse Authority, Oakland Redevelopment Agency and City Council Agency Negotiator: Executive Director Tay Yoshitani Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment OPEN SESSION President Protopappas reconvened the Board in Open Session at 4:11 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Port of Oakland Maritime Facilities
    Port of Oakland Maritime Facilities 0 1/2 1 nautical mile 80 Berths Terminal Union Pacific Tides in San Francisco Bay BNSF Railway N MAGNETIC Railroad San Francisco Bay Area 80 0 1/2 1 mile Mean Mean Mean 14° 11' 20–26 Ports America high low range Sacramento 0 1/2 1 kilometer +5.6 ft -1.3 ft +6.9 ft E Outer Harbor Terminal +1.7m -0.4m +1.3m N 505 50 Operator: Ports America W 580 Santa Rosa Terminal Gates / Berth Numbers 101 Carriers Petaluma UPRR CCNI Maersk S Napa r ive o R Hamburg Süd MSC nt Major Warehouse / Transload Facility Faireld e m ra Hapag-Lloyd Polynesia c 37 80 a S City Development Area Horizon Yang Ming 32nd St. K-Line 80 Vallejo 5 Trade and Logistics Complex San Rafael Richmond 30–32 TraPac Terminal 80 99 Public Truck Scales 101 Operator: TraPac Inc. Concord Carriers Permitted Heavy Weight Container Routes BNSF Toll Plaza BNSF MOL Hyundai For info visit www.portofoakland.com (westbound only) 24 Intermodal San Francisco Facility APL Northport City Truck Telegraph Av. Freeways City Parking San Oakland Stockton Beach Development Francisco Port of 580 UPRR Bay Oakland 680 UPRR 35–38 Ben E. Nutter Terminal Intermodal Rail Facilities Area Alaska St. PCC Logistics SF Int’l Int’l Airport Intermodal OT411 Facility AMNAV Maritime Africa St. West Grand Av. Oakland Airport (OAK) Crowley 808 Operator: Seaside Transportation Corregidor Av. (SFO) Tug Services Tug Service Bataan Av. UPRR 580 Lathrop Services (STS)/Evergreen Burma Rd. S Container Cranes (Port Owned) UPRR a 9 807 n J o 8 Buna St.
    [Show full text]
  • Bay Fill in San Francisco: a History of Change
    SDMS DOCID# 1137835 BAY FILL IN SAN FRANCISCO: A HISTORY OF CHANGE A thesis submitted to the faculty of California State University, San Francisco in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Master of Arts By Gerald Robert Dow Department of Geography July 1973 Permission is granted for the material in this thesis to be reproduced in part or whole for the purpose of education and/or research. It may not be edited, altered, or otherwise modified, except with the express permission of the author. - ii - - ii - TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Maps . vi INTRODUCTION . .1 CHAPTER I: JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES OF SAN FRANCISCO’S TIDELANDS . .4 Definition of Tidelands . .5 Evolution of Tideland Ownership . .5 Federal Land . .5 State Land . .6 City Land . .6 Sale of State Owned Tidelands . .9 Tideland Grants to Railroads . 12 Settlement of Water Lot Claims . 13 San Francisco Loses Jurisdiction over Its Waterfront . 14 San Francisco Regains Jurisdiction over Its Waterfront . 15 The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the Port of San Francisco . 18 CHAPTER II: YERBA BUENA COVE . 22 Introduction . 22 Yerba Buena, the Beginning of San Francisco . 22 Yerba Buena Cove in 1846 . 26 San Francisco’s First Waterfront . 26 Filling of Yerba Buena Cove Begins . 29 The Board of State Harbor Commissioners and the First Seawall . 33 The New Seawall . 37 The Northward Expansion of San Francisco’s Waterfront . 40 North Beach . 41 Fisherman’s Wharf . 43 Aquatic Park . 45 - iii - Pier 45 . 47 Fort Mason . 48 South Beach . 49 The Southward Extension of the Great Seawall .
    [Show full text]
  • Park Report Part 1
    Alcatraz Island Golden Gate National Recreation Area Physical History PRE-EUROPEAN (Pre-1776) Before Europeans settled in San Francisco, the area was inhabited by Native American groups including the Miwok, in the area north of San Francisco Bay (today’s Marin County), and the Ohlone, in the area south of San Francisco Bay (today’s San Francisco peninsula). Then, as today, Alcatraz had a harsh environment –strong winds, fog, a lack of a fresh water source (other than rain or fog), rocky terrain –and there was only sparse vegetation, mainly grasses. These conditions were not conducive to living on the island. These groups may have used the island for a fishing station or they may have visited it to gather seabird eggs since the island did provide a suitable habitat for colonies of seabirds. However, the Miwok and Ohlone do not appear to have lived on Alcatraz or to have visibly altered its landscape, and no prehistoric archeological sites have been identified on the island. (Thomson 1979: 2, Delgado et al. 1991: 8, and Hart 1996: 4). SPANISH AND MEXICAN PERIOD (1776-1846) Early Spanish explorers into Alta California encountered the San Francisco Bay and its islands. (Jose Francisco Ortega saw the bay during his scouting for Gaspar de Portola’s 1769 expedition, and Pedro Fages described the three major islands –Angel, Alcatraz, and Yerba Buena –in his journal from the subsequent 1772 expedition.) However, the first Europeans to record their visit to Alcatraz were aboard the Spanish ship San Carlos, commanded by Juan Manuel de Ayala that sailed through the Golden Gate and anchored off Angel Island in August 1775.
    [Show full text]
  • Port of San Francisco Maritime Cargo and Warehouse Market Analysis
    PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO MARITIME CARGO AND WAREHOUSE MARKET ANALYSIS January 5, 2009 FINAL REPORT Prepared for: Port of San Francisco Prepared by: CBRE Consulting, Inc. Martin Associates EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................ 3 II. ASSESSEMENT OF EXISTING MARKETS............................................................................ 4 1 HISTORIC MARINE CARGO ACTIVITY AT WEST COAST PORTS............................................ 4 2 ASSESSMENT OF COMPETING BAY AREA PORTS ................................................................... 6 2.1 Port of Redwood City ........................................................................................................................ 6 2.2 Port of Richmond .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Port of Stockton ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.4 Port of Sacramento........................................................................................................................... 8 2.5 Port of Benicia................................................................................................................................... 8 3 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
    [Show full text]
  • "Port of San Francisco Shoreside Power Project Press Release
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, October 6, 2010 Contact: Mayor’s Office of Communications, 415-554-6131 Renée Dunn Martin, Port of San Francisco, 415-274-0488 *** PRESS RELEASE *** MAYOR NEWSOM AND THE PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO INAUGURATE CRUISE SHIP USING SHORESIDE POWER San Francisco is first California city where cruise ships can plug in for clean power San Francisco, CA— Mayor Gavin Newsom and the Port of San Francisco today joined Princess Cruises and state and federal agency partners to officially inaugurate shoreside power at Pier 27, allowing Island Princess to shut down her engines and receive clean power from the City’s electrical grid. The Port of San Francisco became the first California port, and one of only a handful of ports in the world, to provide shoreside electrical power for cruise ships while at berth. “Once again we are demonstrating that doing right by the environment doesn’t come at the expense of jobs and economic growth,” said Mayor Newsom. “With shoreside power, we can welcome a growing number of cruise ships and the tourist dollars they bring to San Francisco while protecting the Bay and our local air quality.” Shoreside power results in zero air emissions while a ship is connected in port. This new system is not only the first in the state, but just the fourth in the world. The other cruise ports with shoreside power are Juneau (Alaska), Seattle (Washington), and Vancouver (Canada). The ports of Los Angeles and San Diego also plan to implement this system. Island Princess is operated by Princess Cruises, who developed the shore power technology in Juneau in 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • Board of Port Commissioners City of Oakland
    BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS CITY OF OAKLAND RESOLUTION NO. 05079 RESOLUTION ADOPTING POLICY FOR AWARDING CONCESSION AND CUSTOMER SERVICE PRIVILEGES IN THE TERMINAL BUILDINGS AT OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. RESOLVED that the Board of Port Commissioners hereby finds and determines it is in the best interest of the Port to adopt the Policy For Awarding Concession and Customer Service Privileges in the Terminal Buildings at Oakland International Airport, as described in Agenda Report Item A-3 dated March 15, 2005. At the regular meeting held on March 15, 2005 Passed by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Ayers-Johnson, Batarse, Katzoff, Kiang, Kramer, Protopappas and President Scates – 7 Noes: None Absent: None 67066.v1 POLICY FOR AWARDING CONCESSION AND CUSTOMER SERVICE PRIVILEGES IN THE TERMINAL BUILDINGS AT OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA PORT OF OAKLAND Contents I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. OVERALL POLICY FOR AWARDING CONCESSION AND CUSTOMER SERVICE PRIVILEGES 2 A. Public Notice 2 B. Disadvantaged Business Enterprises C. NON-DISCRIMINATION AND SMALL Local business utilization Policy 3 D. LIVING WAGE AND LABOR STANDARDS POLICY 3 E. Qualifications of Prospective Bidders or Proposers 3 F. Alternative Method of Awarding Concession and Customer Service Privileges 4 G. General Financial Basis for Proposals 7 H. Preproposal and Prebid Conferences 7 I. Local Outreach Meetings 8 J. Formal Submission of Bids or Proposals 8 III. POLICY OUTLINE - INDIVIDUAL CONCESSION AND CUSTOMER SERVICE PRIVILEGES 10 I. INTRODUCTION The Board of Port Commissioners ("Board") of the Port of Oakland ("Port") adopts this concession policy (the "Concession Policy") to govern the awarding of concession and customer service privileges in and adjacent to the Terminal Buildings at the Oakland International Airport ("the Airport").
    [Show full text]
  • Resilience San Francisco
    PROJECT TIMELINES 2018 2019 2020 2021 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 1. Islais Creek Adaptation Strategy 2. Army Corps Flood Study 3. Southern Waterfront Assessment 5. Seawall Program 4. San Francisco Sea Level Rise Action Plan 6. BART SLR Vulnerabilty Assessment 7. ConnectSF 8. Bayview Community-Based Transportation Plan 9. District 10 Mobility Study Resiliency projects that are a key component 10. Southeast Muni Expansion of the Islais Creek Adaptation Strategy MARIN COUNTY ALCATRAZ Adaptation to GOLDEN GATE San Francisco TREASURE rising sea level BRIDGE ISLAND Bay Fisherman’s Wharf Crissy Field BAY ST Resilience San Francisco COLUMBUS AVE 101 80 LOMBARD ST A changing climate will have profound impacts on San Francisco’s communities PRESIDIO 0 Miles 1 BROADWAY and its shoreline. To minimize climate impacts, we need to simultaneously reduce 1 6 5 BAY BRIDGE greenhouse gas emissions while preparing for future climate impacts such as sea CALIFORNIA ST LINCOLN BLVD I Sustainable level rise and coastal flooding. VAN NESS AVE ARGUELLO BLVD and resilient GEARY BLVD 4TH ST 25TH AVE transportation Over the next several decades, sea level rise and coastal flood events are projected MARKET ST MASONIC AVE to increase in frequency and extent. Addressing this climate risk requires urgent China Basin action now and will ultimately help to build a more resilient city. FELL ST STANYAN ST FULTON ST OAK ST 4 2 Sea level rise poses a threat to San Francisco’s neighborhoods and communities, GOLDEN GATE PARK CASTRO ST critical shoreline infrastructure and the transportation system.
    [Show full text]
  • Bureau of Customs and Border Protection CBP Decision 19 CFR PART 101 USCBP–2006–0057 [CBP Dec
    Bureau of Customs and Border Protection CBP Decision 19 CFR PART 101 USCBP–2006–0057 [CBP Dec. 06–23] ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW PORT OF ENTRY AT SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA; REALIGNMENT OF THE PORT LIMITS OF THE PORT OF ENTRY AT SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection; Department of Home- land Security. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This document amends the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) regulations pertaining to the field organization of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) by establishing a new port of entry at Sacramento, California, and terminating the user fee status of Sacramento International Airport. In order to ac- commodate this new port of entry, this document realigns the port boundaries of the port of entry at San Francisco, California (San Francisco-Oakland), since these boundaries currently encompass area that is included within the new port of Sacramento. This change is part of CBP’s continuing program to more efficiently uti- lize its personnel, facilities, and resources to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general public. EFFECTIVE DATE: October 5, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Dore, Of- fice of Field Operations, 202-344-2776. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BACKGROUND In a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) published in the Federal Register (70 FR 52336) on September 2, 2005, CBP pro- posed to amend 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1) by establishing a new port of en- try at Sacramento, California. In the notice, CBP proposed to include 1 2 CUSTOMS BULLETIN AND DECISIONS, VOL. 40, NO. 39, SEPTEMBER 20, 2006 in the port of Sacramento the Sacramento International Airport, cur- rently a user fee airport.
    [Show full text]